Some people believe that in order to be effective political leaders must yield to public opinion and abandon principle for the sake of compromise Others believe that the most essential quality of an effective leader is the ability to remain consistently c

The prompt suggests that while some people believe being an effective political leader entails resilience and commitment, while others argue that leaders should listen to the needs of the public. While I understand that people’s needs must be taken into consideration, I believe that a strong leader is one who is committed to his or her values for two reasons.

Being steadfast in one’s attitude may primarily be the reason a leader was elected in the first place (given that a society is democratic and the leaders are appointed based on a public vote). It is imperative for a leader not to falter on his values, otherwise he may be unable to make informed decisions on his own, and will always be reliant on others. For example, suppose a leader was elected solely due to his campaign stating he is an advocate for gun control. A rise in crime in the city may cause citizens to feel insecure in their homes, and as a result, they would like to purchase a gun for self-defense. Having already imposed strict restrictions on who can purchase a gun, the leader may face backlash and the public may demand a relaxation of gun control. If this leader were to combust under societal pressure, he would not only be compromising his values, but would also cause confusion amongst the public as to where he stands. He may lose credibility, and consequently, the citizens may be left feeling unsure about his competency, while continuing to feel unsafe.

Further, the right decisions to be made may not necessarily be what the public is in favor of. In other words, it is impossible to satisfy everyone, but leaders are (generally) committed to what they believe is within the public’s best interests. For instance, Abraham Lincoln was determined to abolish slavery. While many citizens were against this concept, he focused on what he believed was right, and made it his primary goal to criminalize the concept of slavery. A vast majority of the public was most certainly not happy with this decision, but abolition, along with many of his other decisions, were what helped the country immensely through a tumultuous period. This is not to say that Lincoln ignored the opinions of others; he filled his cabinets not with obedient men, but those who challenged his beliefs, provided constructive criticism, and helped pave the path towards progression.

Of course, there is no better indicator of the welfare of a society than its people. Many of the basic rights we have achieved today are the result of years of public pressure on the government and leaders. Consider the reemergence of the Black Lives Matter movement soon after the murder of George Floyd, protests and public outcry were what initiated discussions to defund the police and reallocate resources to social services instead. The governments that approved these decisions were not weak, their stances had not vacillated, but the voices of the public allowed leaders to analyze the situation in its entirety and make an informed decision following introspection. Hence, to say that a leader who does not listen to her citizens is unreliable or incompetent, may not always hold water.

Observing trends in history, the real details of leadership are sticking to one’s beliefs, but an effective leader must also be willing to cooperate, compromise, and work effectively with other people. Being a leader is, undoubtedly, a tough job, and if one cannot find the right balance of cooperation and tenacity, he may do so at his own peril.